Oops, she did it again: Bachmann says ‘Barack Obama’s views are against America’

Doesn’t she ever shut up?

There was no oops in the first place and there is no oops now. She stated that Ayers and his ilk were anti-american which is painfully obvious. In addition, her words were twisted by liberal media such as the Minnesota Independent (With titles that include the word McCarthyism when its crystal clear that Bachmann wasn’t suggesting that.)

This is clearly political spin and I challenge anyone here to try and think obectively about it.

It is essentially a smear campaign against Bachmann with no real substance to it and no real fact. Basically a bunch of word twists and over exagerations. If you disagree lets debate.

I find it funny that you think a man with less than a year in the senate is ready to run this nation. Freshman Senator Barack Hussein Obama II would have been a perfect fit for VP to Senator Clinton of NY. But no, the Democrats once again have to pick a man to lead the party. Have you been watching Freshman Senator Barack Hussein Obama II’s numbers? they have been falling. Yes he is in the lead but all that was gained in the summer has gone. So like the turning of the leaves I too must turn my vote to a Man who has a track record longer than his running record. Without Hillary running I am Proud to cast my vote for Senator John McCain our next President.

It is painfully obvious that Bachmann said Obama was anti-American. If she meant William Ayers I didn’t hear or read that. If she did it is her subjective opinion and it is a debatable point and one I think is false. It is not “objectively true”. Bachmann is spinning by trying to talk out of both sides of her mouth at the same time: “Obama should be investigated for being anti-American” out of one side and then “I never said that! I was trapped! I was misconstrued! I misspoke!” out of the other.

A smear campaign is what happened when wingnuts Corsi and the Swiftboar liars made a series of false accusations about John Kerry’s war record. A smear campaign is what happened chicken hawk Karl Rove and his fellow yellow belly chickenhawks attacked Max Cleland for somehow not deserving the war medals he received. A smear campaign is trying to falsely accuse Barack Obama of being an Arab Muslim, as if there is even anything wrong with that, And a smear campaign is falsely accusing him of “palling around” with terrorists, insinuating that 1) Bill Ayers is a terrorist which is false and 2) that Obama has anything but a passing acquaintance with the man.

There is nothing to debate. A wingnut has been called out on her mudslinging and mcCarthyite tactics and wingnuts hate it that their lying schtick which has worked for so many years to conceal their total lack of substance is no longer working.

ultranit,

Keep spinning. Bachmann is exposed for the whack job she is: a fundamentalist extremist, no different then the Muslim radicals that formed the Taliban in Afghanistan. Fortunately, patriotic Americans are waking up to the ultra extreme agenda of these evangelicals and their attempt to make this a country of cultists like them.

By the way, defending her here in no way increases your chances of sleeping with her.

By the way, ultranit,I think your Republican pals have gotten the clue:

GOP Pulling Its Ads From Bachmann’s Race, Media Buyers Say
October 22, 2008 03:05 PM

Five days after Rep. Michele Bachmann went on a McCarthy-esque rant suggesting Barack Obama was unpatriotic and urging the major newspapers of the country to investigate anti-American sentiment in Congress, the national Republican political parties are running for cover.

Two sources aware of ad buys in Minnesota say that the National Republican Congressional Committee is pulling its media purchases from Bachmann’s race. If true, it is a remarkable fall for a congresswoman who, until recently, seemed relatively safe in her predominantly conservative district. The race had become closer in recent days — the NRCC had transferred funds from Rep. Erik Paulsen (MN-03) to Bachmann a little over a week ago.

In the days following her appearance on Hardball, however, Bachmann has watched as her challenger, El Tinklenberg raised more than a million dollars off her incendiary remarks. That surge in fundraising put Bachmann’s re-election in a far less certain position. Bachmann tried to stem the bleeding by telling the press she was sorry for her remarks. But with the national party now apparently pulling the plug, the situation has gone from bad to worse.

Yo ultraplops – watch the video with Matthews again (or maybe it’d be your first time). Matthews didn’t set her up or anything. Rather, he was freaking incredulous at what she was saying and simply kept asking her to repeat what she was saying. In other words, handing her more rope. Takes chutzpah for her now to blame him.

**A smear campaign is what happened when wingnuts Corsi and the Swiftboar liars made a series of false accusations about John Kerry’s war record.**

You are absolutely right, thats what politicians do. But that is besides the point; do you agree or disagree about the point I was making.

“”There is nothing to debate. A wingnut has been called out on her mudslinging and mcCarthyite tactics and wingnuts hate it that their lying schtick which has worked for so many years to conceal their total lack of substance is no longer working.”"

There is plenty to debate and there is a total lack of substance, not only from Minnesota Independant and similar media sources, but yes also from the primary party candidates. The only difference is that apparently you don’t need substance if you are a liberal!!

**And a smear campaign is falsely accusing him of “palling around” with terrorists, insinuating that 1) Bill Ayers is a terrorist which is false and 2) that Obama has anything but a passing acquaintance with the man. **

If bombing the pentagon, police stations, and attempting to kill innocent people with the explicit purpose of raising terror among the American people doesn’t make you a terrorist, please explain to me what is. I would be really interested to know.

**that Obama has anything but a passing acquaintance with the man.**

No he closely worked with Ayers on a board, gave speeches with, and Ayers threw a fundraiser to help start off his political career. The latter of which is the most disturbing to non-obama zealots. If a domestic terrorist throws someone a fundraiser, it probably means that the person may share some of the same political views, which is the point of what Bachmann said.

“”Keep spinning. Bachmann is exposed for the whack job she is: a fundamentalist extremist, no different then the Muslim radicals that formed the Taliban in Afghanistan”"

No different eh? You have some interesting opinions to say the least.

“”By the way, defending her here in no way increases your chances of sleeping with her.”"

Thats what you think! Shh, don’t tell Pelosi though, she would raise taxes on me if she caught me cheating on her.

“”…the national Republican political parties are running for cover.”"

Yes, she has been thrown under the bus, not just any bus either, an omnibus. Which is pretty lame considering she was essentially restating what other republicans have been saying about Ayers and Obama.

“he made me say things”
from the party of personal resposibility

“”Yo ultraplops – watch the video with Matthews again (or maybe it’d be your first time). Matthews didn’t set her up or anything…”"

Okay, I call your watching and raise you two watchings because I didn’t at any point hear her call anyone anti-american except for Ayers and the like. She then stated that she wished the media would expose political views of Congress in relation to anti-americanism. Maybe I’m just wierd, but I am not offended in the slightest if the press informs me of a politician’s political view. I think thats a good thing actually. Do you disagree with me there? The other thing is that she only stated that she *wished* they would do it, meaning she wasn’t making any claims or accusations on Congress person.

Also, let me explain McCarthyism. McCarty ran criminal charges such as treason for people holding specific views, much like a witch hunt, the charges were often false.

Wanting to know a politicians political view in relation to anti-americanism is not even close to McCarthyism. If she had made an actual accusation or filed charges or called for a hearing, yes, but that is absolutely not what she did or suggested.

ultraplops.. and once the media begins its investigations.. what exactly should they be looking for? Would you or Ms Bachmann be so kind a to provide a definition of Pro-American so they can properly identify the Anti-Americans? Of course it would all have to be built on something other than innuendo.

As for McCarthyism, read your history before you try to explain it to others. The bulk of the McCarthy and HUAC accusations revolved around membership, or even former membership, in the Communisty party. Neither Membership in the Communist Party nor the Communist Party itself were illegal. The cases were built around the fact that the Communist Party took direction from Moscow, which was, in fact, partially true. Nevertheless, HUAC and McCarthy built their cases entirely on innuendo, often condemning people on someone else’s word that they had seen them at a Communist party event, and nothing more.

No formal charges of treason were brought before a court, and as I already mentioned, being a communist was not illegal. Still isn’t, as a matter of fact. Essentially, what happened in the McCarthy era was that people were maligned on the basis of hearsay and innuendo, often to the loss of their livelihood and no court in the land was involved in this.

There is only one place in this country to properly accuse someone, and that is in a court of law. There the right to defend oneself, and to be innocent until proven guilty, is both implicit and very Pro-American. Ms Bachmann, if she is sincere in her beliefs that there are Anti-Americans in Congres, and if somehow an actual legal charge can be assessed, can feel free to call for a special prosecutor to investigate the matter. Then they can bring the “offenders” before a judge. Calling on the media to do it is very much the McCarthy tactic of extra-legality.

The new Tinklenberg commercial script:

Tinklenberg: I’m Elwyn Tinklenberg, and I approved this message.
Bachmann: I’m Michele Bachmann, and I paid for this message.

Hmmm, lets see here. Obama associates with an un-repentant scumbag terrorist that now teaches at the University of Illinois. Obama denies any “meaningful” association, but served on two seperate non-profit boards and launched his political career from said scumbags house. And Rep. Bachmann (who I will say blew it going onto Matthews show, who by the way is the same guy that Senator Zell Miller D-GA wanted to take out back and kick his ass) is getting a rectal exam by liberal biased media. I honestly don’t know why anyone with brains pays any attention whatsoever to the garbage the media prints and I also have no idea why anyone with brains pays any attention whatsoever to: Matthews, Olbermann, Stewart, Letterman and these jokes from Hollywood who think we should worship their “endorsements.” Let’s examine this: Aside from a few journalism degrees, do any of the forementioned have a degree in political science? Then why pay any attention to these idiots. The other ? is this; With Muslim extremism a very near and dear threat, what the hell is the matter identifying someone who doesn’t hold Americas beliefs close to the heart? We’re the best, nicest, most giving nation in the world. Why the shame? Anyhow, gotta go. Time to send Michelle Bachmanns campaign more $$$.

Tell you what Rick.. you’re right.. don’t listen to Matthews. Instead go get a transcript of the interview, paste it in Word, then delete everything Matthews said, leaving only what Bachmann said. Done that? Good.

Once you read what is left, you can see where the outrage comes from, outrage from both Republicans and Democrats, not to dismiss the Independents. Don’t blame the medium for the message. Bachmann’s claim she was misled or trapped loses its meaning a bit if you do the same with the transcript of her interview on Fox 9, done two days later, where she once more calls for a media investigation (you know, the media you don’t trust but apparently she does considering she’s done some 23 nationally televised appearances in the last couple of months.)
http://www.myfoxtwincities.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=7683782&version=1&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=3.2.1

I neglected to mention in my post that Elwyn Tinklenberg said that at a fundraiser tonight. That’s a paraphrase, not an exact quote, because I don’t precisely remember it. It wasn’t recorded.

“”No formal charges of treason were brought before a court, and as I already mentioned, being a communist was not illegal. Still isn’t, as a matter of fact. Essentially, what happened in the McCarthy era was that people were maligned on the basis of hearsay and innuendo, often to the loss of their livelihood and no court in the land was involved in this.”"

I have to admit my history is a bit rusty, but there were legal procedings, charges, and people did go to jail as well as some being blacklisted which is different than the press reporting a politicians political views. If Treason was not the charge, then it was the implication, or it may have been charges related to disloyalty, I will have to double check that I admit.

The distinction is still that Bachmann was asking for the investigation of political views of political candidates for the only purpose of knowing the political views of who the public is voting for. She did not call for legal proceedings or suggest disloyalty.

Essentially, if the press can investigate Palin, link her to radical secession groups, find out her views, etc, they can certainly do the same to other people in Congress, it is not unethical. If you disagree, please explain to me whether you think the deep investigation on Palin is unethical.

While I agree that McCarthyism was a horrible thing, it is still okay for the press to inform the american people whether a candidate is tied to a communist, socialist, secessionist, or whatever group. We have a right as citizens of a representative democracy, to know a political candidate’s political views.

Those that went to jail went under the charge of Contempt of Congress, primarily those early in the hearings that pleaded the 1st and not the 5th ammendment on the grounds of freedom of assembly. This was effectively their right to associate with communists if they so chose. 5th ammendment suited those pressing the hearings better because they saw it as an inherent admission of guilt.

I’ll skip most of the rest of the arguments, for sake of brevity, and touch simply on your last point.

Some of our representatives may indeed be communists or socialists (secessionists? – they even exist anymore?) as is perfectly within their rights, as long as they hold to their oath of office to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. (Kindly look up Senator Bernie Sanders, btw, rumor has it he is a card carrying Socialist.)

Comes down to it, every member of Congress represents a State or district, each with its own media, most faced opponents for election and/or reelection, so if it comes down to it, that is where so called un-American allegiances may be uncovered. In the end, I trust that the voters of each respective candidate’s state or district knew what they were doing in voting him/her into office. I don’t put my faith in the paranoia of a few who see secret agendas or ulterior motives such as driving this country into ruination. If there are ulterior motives, they are the same that have been there for centuries: power, ego gratification, fame, self-importance, greed.

Give the underlying conspiracy theory a rest, please.

Ricknit….

Yes. Use that rationalization and send it to two of your Republican friends, and have then send it to two of their Republican friends…. yada yada yada…

I somehow doubt that psychoBachmann will receive the positive response that Tinklenberg did.

You Nit….

Dear Eric F.,
Laugh out loud funny! Neither Jay nor David could do it any better than that…thanks.

Dear Ultraplops,

Uhhh…”She did not…suggest disloyalty”? Hmm…so I guess being “anti-American” isn’t considered disloyal, or saying “anti-American” things, or hanging with “anti-American” folk?

FYI: “Anti: A person who is opposed to something…” So tell me, how can you be OPPOSED to America, but not be considered disloyal to America?

“”(Kindly look up Senator Bernie Sanders, btw, rumor has it he is a card carrying Socialist.) “”

I have heard the same thing, and another funny tidbit is that Obama votes to the left of Bernie Sanders.

“”Give the underlying conspiracy theory a rest, please.”"

What conspriracy are you talking about? My point is that Bachamann’s statements had nothing to do with McCarthyism and the campaign condeming her for saying what she said is based on twisting her words and over exaggerating.

“”FYI: “Anti: A person who is opposed to something…” So tell me, how can you be OPPOSED to America, but not be considered disloyal to America?”"

Thats a good question because it seems so contradictory. Disloyalty would mean treason, not upholding the constitution, or something that would involve legal recourse or reprimand. Where as having opposing viewpoints are just that, viewpoints nothing else. What Bachmann is alluding to is that someone with opposing viewpoints would steer the country down a path that most people wouldn’t want to go down.

If there was a God he would have dropped a house on this witch by now.